Skip to content

Conversation

@sandeep-katta
Copy link
Contributor

@sandeep-katta sandeep-katta commented Dec 23, 2019

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Upgrade jackson-databind to 2.6.7.3 to following CVE

CVE-2018-14718 - CVE-2018-14721
FasterXML/jackson-databind#2097

CVE-2018-19360, CVE-2018-19361, CVE-2018-19362
FasterXML/jackson-databind#2186

tag: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-databind/commits/jackson-databind-2.6.7.3

Why are the changes needed?

CVE-2018-14718,CVE-2018-14719,CVE-2018-14720,CVE-2018-14721,CVE-2018-19360,CVE-2018-19361,CVE-2018-19362

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No

How was this patch tested?

Existing UT

@sandeep-katta
Copy link
Contributor Author

@srowen @dongjoon-hyun

Copy link
Member

@srowen srowen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You might have to run dev/test-dependencies.sh --replace-manifest but looks OK otherwise

@maropu
Copy link
Member

maropu commented Dec 24, 2019

ok to test

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Dec 24, 2019

Test build #115673 has finished for PR 26986 at commit 25de967.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@maropu maropu changed the title [SPARK-30333][CORE] Upgrade jackson-databind to 2.6.7.3 [SPARK-30333][CORE][BUILD] Upgrade jackson-databind to 2.6.7.3 Dec 24, 2019
maropu pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 24, 2019
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Upgrade jackson-databind to 2.6.7.3 to following CVE

CVE-2018-14718 - CVE-2018-14721
FasterXML/jackson-databind#2097

CVE-2018-19360, CVE-2018-19361, CVE-2018-19362
FasterXML/jackson-databind#2186

tag: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-databind/commits/jackson-databind-2.6.7.3

### Why are the changes needed?
CVE-2018-14718,CVE-2018-14719,CVE-2018-14720,CVE-2018-14721,CVE-2018-19360,CVE-2018-19361,CVE-2018-19362

### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No

### How was this patch tested?
Existing UT

Closes #26986 from sandeep-katta/jacksonUpgrade.

Authored-by: sandeep katta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Takeshi Yamamuro <[email protected]>
@maropu
Copy link
Member

maropu commented Dec 24, 2019

@sandeep-katta oh... Can you open another new pr for master? In this pr, the target is branch-2.4 and I couldn't cherry-pick it cleanly..

@sandeep-katta
Copy link
Contributor Author

@sandeep-katta oh... Can you open another new pr for master? In this pr, the target is branch-2.4 and I couldn't cherry-pick it cleanly..

Master is using 2.10.0, so not required to merge this to master

@maropu
Copy link
Member

maropu commented Dec 24, 2019

ah... if so, can you add [BRANCH-2.4] in the title?

@sandeep-katta sandeep-katta changed the title [SPARK-30333][CORE][BUILD] Upgrade jackson-databind to 2.6.7.3 [SPARK-30333][CORE][BUILD][BRANCH-2.4] Upgrade jackson-databind to 2.6.7.3 Dec 24, 2019
@maropu
Copy link
Member

maropu commented Dec 24, 2019

ok, Thanks! Merged to branch-2.4.

@maropu maropu closed this Dec 24, 2019
@dongjoon-hyun
Copy link
Member

dongjoon-hyun commented Jan 17, 2020

Hi, All. It seems that we missed sbt build.
It's added at #26417 before this PR. I'll make a follow-up.

dongjoon-hyun added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 17, 2020
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?

This PR aims to update `SparkBuild.scala` as a follow-up of
[SPARK-30333 Upgrade jackson-databind to 2.6.7.3](#26986).

### Why are the changes needed?

Since SPARK-29781, we override SBT Jackson dependency like Maven.

### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

### How was this patch tested?

Pass the Jenkins.

Closes #27256 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-30333.

Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants